What Was Yosef Telling Yaakov?

Parshat Vayeshev

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

It’s a famous story. Yosef’s brothers didn’t like him. 

But why? Because of the coat? Because his father liked him more? Could they not see that Rachel had died, and Yaakov, traumatized, is turning to Yosef as the replacement for Yosef’s dead mother upon whom he could shower his love? 

It is most likely that what the brothers found most objectionable about Yosef is that he seems to be a snitch. He tells on them to their father. (37:2) What does he tell their father? The Torah does not say, but nonetheless there is much speculation in the world of Rabbinic Text and commentary. 

 Note that Rabbenu Bachaye distinguishes between one who is מביא דבה (brings accusations) and a מוציא דבה (brings out accusations) in that the former is telling truths, while the latter is making everything up and lying. The Torah describes that which Yosef is “telling” as מביא דבה – whatever he was saying was thus the truth. The questions we then have include – was there more context to whatever he was saying? What was his intention in telling over the דבה – was he looking to get them in trouble, or was he looking to help them? Was he in the right or in the wrong in being the tattletale? Is whatever he did considered tattling? 

In the Yerushalmi Peah 1:4a-b: 

Rabbi Meir: they were suspect of eating from live animals (אבר מן החי) 

Rabbi Yehuda: they disregarded the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, treating them like slaves 

Rabbi Shimon: they had their eyes on the daughters of the land 

R Yuda ben Pazi suggested that God took these errant accusations and threw them back on Yosef. 

1. They slaughtered a goat in order to dip Yosef’s coat in blood (indicating that they were used to shechitah, even when they weren't killing an animal to eat it!) 

2. They sold Yosef as a slave 

3. Potiphar’s wife had her eyes on Yosef 

Rashi mentions all 3 with considerable brevity. The Pesikta quotes these as well, noting that he was punished specifically for bringing this information to their father. In other words, simply for being a snitch. 

 On the first accusation noted above, Targum Yonatan expands and says they specifically ate (or cooked with) body parts that hang off animal’s body, such as ears or a tail. 

On the 3rd accusation, R Chaim Paltiel says Yosef was wrong because he did not them the benefit of whatever doubt in terms of their intentions and actions. This is a view Riv’a also champions in the first accusation, that perhaps they took certain parts of an animal for eating after it had been slaughtered, but while its nerves were still jerking in post-slaughter spasms. So the animal looked like it was alive, but in actuality it was not. (see also the Maharal in Gur Aryeh) 

Rashi goes on to say that Yosef would say anything about them that would make them look bad. In other words, he engaged in the classic formula of gossiping. (see also B’chor Shor) Rashbam takes the 2nd accusation, of how they treated the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, and compared this to his own very favorable behavior towards them. (Rashbam also specifically rejects every other view!) Ibn Ezra says it’s the opposite – the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah made Yosef be their “shamash” (equivalent of servant) because he was younger than them. 

 Some of the commentaries are a little more logical in their “analysis” of what Yosef spoke of. Seforno, for example, says he told their father they were careless in their care for his animals, costing him money in their blunders and animal “losses.” 

Most logically, Radak says he reported to their father that his brothers hated him. The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah – to whom he was closer in age – saw him as a contemporary who was more privileged, due to his mother; and the sons of Leah, most of whom were several years older than him, saw him as a favorite son, even though he was just about the youngest (though interestingly, Zevulun might have been younger than him!). Kli Yakar says he spoke of the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, who were not nice to the sons of Leah. 

 Ramban makes a distinction between the hatred the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah had and the jealousy the sons of Leah had, and infers from there that the Dibbah was aimed at rhe sons of Bilhah and Zilpah more, who Yosef spent more time with, and who therefore were more subject to his snitching. Chizkuni says the same, while also reminding the readers that Yosef snitched because, as the Torah attests, he was a נער. This does not excuse any behavior, but a נער – a naïve young man – is less to blame for this “childish” act of “telling on so-and-so.” Baal HaTurim supports this by noting that the word נער (naïve young man) has the same numerical value (gematria) as the word שוטה (fool) suggesting that one who gossips is a fool – as per Mishlei 10:18. (See also Haamek Davar) 

Most creatively, Alshikh notes the change from the Torah referring to the Patriarch as Yaakov in the first two verses of the parsha (in which Yosef’s sharing דבה is mentioned) (37:1-2) to his name being presented as Yisrael in the very next verse (37:3), “And Yisrael loved Yosef of all his brothers…” 

Could it be that the Torah’s distinguishing between presenting our forefather here, first as Yaakov then as Yisrael, is a way of noting different aspects of his essence, and different ways in which Yosef related to him? Absolutely. And the idea of all the brothers sometimes being referred to as Bnei Yaakov and sometimes as Bnei Yisrael is also indicative of different ways in which they are meeting their own destinies. 

 To add a small detail to the mix, some commentaries (e.g. Haktav V’haKabbalah) note that Yosef’s intention was to tell their father, and ONLY their father, because he was in the best position to steer Yosef’s brothers, Yaakov’s sons, in a proper direction. Yosef had no evil design. He wasn’t looking to plaster his brothers’ missteps on walls, or to announce it to the world, or create headlines. His motivation was sincere – letting the person with the most influence, their father!, know about their youthful missteps, so he could lead them in a proper direction. 

So, which one is it? Were the brothers sinners? Did Yosef see right through them? Or did Yosef see what he wanted to see, and missed context and reality? Was Yosef really so naïve? Were the brothers so mean? Surely the answers to all of these depend on one’s perspective. Some will argue they were all righteous, so the text can’t be understood so literally. Others will argue that there is more below the surface than meets the eye. 

But we can say with absolute certainty that jealousy and hatred are bad ingredients in what should be a healthy relationship. And that parents need to be more resilient in guiding their children to see the best in one another and to get along with one another. 

 דבה is not usually a good ingredient for people to like one another or for leading people to forgive one another. [Forgiveness in the Torah is a much more difficult subject, as it doesn’t really happen with other people – God is forgiving. People… not so much.] 

And so, however it is defined, and whatever the brothers were doing – it was the wrong time and place for Yosef to tell their father about it. 

 May our conversations be productive, and respectful to other people. May we judge favorably. And may we find a way through difficult topics, without using the method of דבה which was so destructive in this tale.